wireless
wireless
Posted Nov 24, 2008 22:01 UTC (Mon) by xaoc (guest, #54140)In reply to: Yes. Now nvidia sucks even more. by mjg59
Parent article: VIA releases chipset documentation
Posted Nov 24, 2008 22:12 UTC (Mon)
by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Nov 28, 2008 14:58 UTC (Fri)
by jch (guest, #51929)
[Link] (1 responses)
Atheros' firmware is a very thin layer that doesn't change. All of the interesting stuff (association, link quality computation, rate control etc.) happens in the driver.
Intel's firmware is a huge piece of software, larger than most drivers. It implements a lot of stuff that any self-respecting free software developer would like to be able to modify.
Posted Nov 28, 2008 15:18 UTC (Fri)
by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239)
[Link]
Posted Nov 26, 2008 23:04 UTC (Wed)
by khim (subscriber, #9252)
[Link]
I always wondered why so many people are insisting on having source for
firmware of videocard or wireless chip while happily using binary blobs
embedded in HDD, CPU (yes, both Intel and AMD CPUs require binary
blobs to operate) and other components. Why 10 or more binary blobs
embedded here in there in your system don't bother you, but single one
sitting on your CD is such a big deal? And why trivial move of said blob
from CD to embedded ROM suddenly make hardware more acceptable? I can see why binary drivers embedded in kernel are bad idea: there are
no "walls" in the kernel and so any driver can bring the whole system down
(and DMA gurantees that even microkernel will not solve this problem), but
firmware for Intel wireless device works on different CPU - like firmware
for HDD, CD-ROM or Ethernet card! The host system just uploads it, nothing
more...
wireless
wireless
wireless
It does require binary blob